ignite-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Petr Ivanov <mr.wei...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Code inspection
Date Wed, 19 Dec 2018 08:31:18 GMT
Investigating problem, stand by.


> On 18 Dec 2018, at 19:41, Dmitriy Pavlov <dpavlov@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> Both patches were applied. Maxim, thank you!
> 
> What about 1. An `Unexpected error during build messages processing in
> TeamCity`, what can we do as the next step to fix it?
> 
> Sincerely,
> Dmitriy Pavlov
> 
> пн, 17 дек. 2018 г. в 18:31, Andrey Mashenkov <andrey.mashenkov@gmail.com>:
> 
>> Maxim,
>> 
>> Looks ok. Let's apply IGNITE-10682.
>> 
>> All,
>> 
>> Also, I'd like to publish idea.logs into artefacts by default.
>> This will give us more details for investigation in future if any failure
>> will occurs.
>> It will costs 1-10 kB.
>> 
>> On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 3:21 PM Maxim Muzafarov <maxmuzaf@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Dmitry,
>>> 
>>> It seems to me that we have two independent issues here.
>>> 1. An `Unexpected error during build messages processing in TeamCity`
>>> error message which is related to TC agent configuration. Suppose,
>>> server.log will provide us more details about it. I have to access
>>> there.
>>> 2. A new set of inspection rules was introduced in 2018+ IntelliJ IDEA
>>> and they should be disabled in our ignite_inspections_teamcity.xml
>>> configuration file. They are not fixed in the Apache Ignite project
>>> code yet. I've prepared the issue [1] for it. Please, take a look.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Andrey,
>>> 
>>> I've fixed disabled plugins file according to your suggestions. The
>>> issue [2] is ready. I've re-run `Excluded [Inspections] Core Debug`
>>> suite and the log details show me that now only 3 plugins are enabled:
>>> IDEA CORE, Maven Integration, Properties Support. It seems to me that
>>> it's correct.
>>> 
>>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-10709
>>> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-10682
>>> 
>>> On Sat, 15 Dec 2018 at 15:22, Dmitriy Pavlov <dpavlov@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Folks,
>>>> 
>>>> There is a strange error on TC
>>>> 
>>> 
>> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=2556875&buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_InspectionsCore
>>>> 
>>>> It appeared after TC update to the latest version.
>>>> 
>>>> Sincerely,
>>>> Dmitry Pavlov
>>>> 
>>>> пт, 14 дек. 2018 г. в 16:09, Andrey Mashenkov <
>>> andrey.mashenkov@gmail.com>:
>>>> 
>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>> 
>>>>> PR is incomplete. Some plugins should be disabled with different
>>> id\name.
>>>>> Maven plugin shouldn't be disabled as Idea Inspector use it to use
>>> Ignite
>>>>> project pom file.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Please, find details in ticket.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 12:00 PM Andrey Mashenkov <
>>>>> andrey.mashenkov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thanks, I'll check PR and let you know about results.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> For now, Inspections task execution time looks much better (15-22
>>> min),
>>>>>> but fluctuation is still noticeable.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 11:13 AM Maxim Muzafarov <
>> maxmuzaf@gmail.com
>>>> 
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Andrey,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Thanks! I've consulted with the IntelliJ IDEA source code and
>> found
>>>>>>> how this disabled plugins file should look like. I've created
a
>> new
>>>>>>> issue [1] and prepared PR [2] with the set of disabled plugins
>>> (maybe
>>>>>>> not complete set). I don't have access to change corresponding
>>>>>>> `~Excluded [Inspections] Core Debug` test suite properties.
>>>>>>> Can we test this PR?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-10682
>>>>>>> [2] https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/5666
>>>>>>> On Thu, 13 Dec 2018 at 17:35, Andrey Mashenkov
>>>>>>> <andrey.mashenkov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Idea has a file in config directory
>> ./config/disabled_plugins.txt
>>> ,
>>>>> you
>>>>>>> can easily find it at you local machine.
>>>>>>>> Teamcity Inspections runner has an option "Disabled plugins"
>> where
>>>>>>> disabled_plugins.txt file content can be set.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> So, looks like we can disable useless plugins.
>>>>>>>> But I'm not expert and can't suggest changes we can safely
>> apply.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 4:59 PM Maxim Muzafarov <
>>> maxmuzaf@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Andrey,
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Thank you for solving this issue with GC pauses! I've
checked
>> the
>>>>>>>>> given report. The inspections configuration is correct,
but it
>>> seems
>>>>>>>>> to me that we have enabled by default rules of included
plugins
>>> (for
>>>>>>>>> instance, KotlinInternalInJava in the report is enabled).
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Can you share more details about `disable plugin` option
you
>>> found?
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> I see that idea instance starts with the default
>>> -Didea.plugins.path
>>>>>>>>> system property, can we change it so the plugins will
be not
>>> loaded
>>>>> by
>>>>>>>>> default?
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 13 Dec 2018 at 15:45, Andrey Mashenkov
>>>>>>>>> <andrey.mashenkov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> It looks like we can't make logs more verbose due
to possible
>>> bug,
>>>>>>> I've create a ticket in Jetbrains Jira [1].
>>>>>>>>>> We can just publish idea logs in artefacts as suggested
in
>> this
>>>>>>> manual [2].
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> For now, Inspections logs looks like this one [3].
>>>>>>>>>> Also, would you please to take a look at inspection
report
>> and
>>>>> check
>>>>>>> if we missed smth and there are any unwanted inspection turned
on.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> [1] https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/TW-58422
>>>>>>>>>> [2]
>>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>> 
>> https://confluence.jetbrains.com/display/TCD10/Reporting+Issues#ReportingIssues-IntelliJIDEAInspections
>>>>>>>>>> [3]
>>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>> 
>> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=2538111&buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_ExcludedInspections2&tab=artifacts
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 3:19 PM Dmitriy Pavlov <
>>> dpavlov@apache.org
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim M, do you know if we can disable inspections
by
>>> wildcard?
>>>>> E.g.
>>>>>>>>>>> Android* ?
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> чт, 13 дек. 2018 г. в 14:59, Andrey Mashenkov
<
>>>>>>> andrey.mashenkov@gmail.com>:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Fixed memory issues with increasing heap
size and forcing
>>> G1GC.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Do we need all these plugins loaded for inspections?
>>>>>>>>>>>> I've found a 'disable plugin' option in TC
Inspections
>> build
>>>>>>> configuration,
>>>>>>>>>>>> but it is unclear how to disable plugin correctly.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Can someone take over this?
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 46 plugins initialized in 1031 ms
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2018-12-13 10:55:24,875 [ 1342] INFO
-
>>>>>>> llij.ide.plugins.PluginManager -
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Loaded bundled plugins: Android Support
(10.2.3), Ant
>>> Support
>>>>>>> (1.0), CSS
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Support (172.4574.11), Database Tools
and SQL
>>> (172.4574.11),
>>>>>>> Eclipse
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Integration (3.0), FreeMarker support
(1.0), GWT Support
>>>>> (1.0),
>>>>>>> Gradle
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (172.4574.11), Groovy (9.0), Guice (8.0),
HTML Tools
>>> (2.0),
>>>>>>> Hibernate
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Support (1.0), I18n for Java (172.4574.11),
IDEA CORE
>>>>>>> (172.4574.11),
>>>>>>>>>>>>> IntelliLang (8.0), JBoss Seam Support
(1.0), JUnit
>> (1.0),
>>> Java
>>>>>>> EE: Bean
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Validation Support (1.1), Java EE: Contexts
and
>> Dependency
>>>>>>> Injection
>>>>>>>>>>>> (1.1),
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Java EE: EJB, JPA, Servlets (1.0), Java
EE: Java Server
>>> Faces
>>>>>>> (2.2.X.),
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Java EE: Web Services (JAX-WS) (1.9),
Java Server Pages
>>> (JSP)
>>>>>>> Integration
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (1.0), JavaScript Support (1.0), Kotlin
>>>>>>> (1.1.4-release-IJ2017.2-3), Maven
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Integration (172.4574.11), Persistence
Frameworks
>> Support
>>>>>>> (1.0), Plugin
>>>>>>>>>>>>> DevKit (1.0), Properties Support (172.4574.11),
>> QuirksMode
>>>>>>> (172.4574.11),
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Spring AOP/@AspectJ (1.0), Spring Batch
(1.0), Spring
>> Data
>>>>>>> (1.0), Spring
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Integration Patterns (1.0), Spring Security
(1.0),
>> Spring
>>>>>>> Support (1.0),
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Spring Web Flow (1.0), Spring Web Services
(1.0), Struts
>>> 1.x
>>>>>>> (2.0),
>>>>>>>>>>>> Struts
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 (1.0), TestNG-J (8.0), UI Designer
(172.4574.11),
>>> Velocity
>>>>>>> support
>>>>>>>>>>>> (1.0),
>>>>>>>>>>>>> W3C Validators (2.0), WebLogic Integration
(1.0),
>>> XPathView +
>>>>>>> XSLT
>>>>>>>>>>>> Support
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (4)
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Kotlin plugins fails to start, let's disable
it.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2018-12-13 10:55:27,623 [   4090]   INFO
-
>>>>>>>>>>>> il.indexing.FileBasedIndexImpl - Rebuild
requested for
>> index
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>> org.jetbrains.kotlin.idea.versions.KotlinJvmMetadataVersionIndex
>>>>>>>>>>>>> java.lang.Throwable
>>>>>>>>>>>>>      at
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>> 
>> com.intellij.util.indexing.FileBasedIndex.requestRebuild(FileBasedIndex.java:68)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>      at
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>> 
>> org.jetbrains.kotlin.idea.versions.KotlinUpdatePluginComponent.initComponent(KotlinUpdatePluginComponent.kt:54)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>      at
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>> 
>> com.intellij.openapi.components.impl.ComponentManagerImpl$ComponentConfigComponentAdapter.getComponentInstance(ComponentManagerImpl.java:492)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>      at
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>> 
>> com.intellij.openapi.components.impl.ComponentManagerImpl.createComponents(ComponentManagerImpl.java:118)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>      at
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>> 
>> com.intellij.openapi.application.impl.ApplicationImpl.a(ApplicationImpl.java:462)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>      at
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>> 
>> com.intellij.openapi.application.impl.ApplicationImpl.createComponents(ApplicationImpl.java:466)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>      at
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>> 
>> com.intellij.openapi.components.impl.ComponentManagerImpl.init(ComponentManagerImpl.java:102)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>      at
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>> 
>> com.intellij.openapi.application.impl.ApplicationImpl.load(ApplicationImpl.java:421)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>      at
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>> 
>> com.intellij.openapi.application.impl.ApplicationImpl.load(ApplicationImpl.java:407)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>      at
>>>>>>> com.intellij.idea.IdeaApplication.run(IdeaApplication.java:203)
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 1:45 PM Dmitriy Pavlov
<
>>>>>>> dpavlov@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sure, let's apply. I hope all TC agents
may handle 4G
>>> heap.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> чт, 13 дек. 2018 г. в 12:54, Andrey
Mashenkov <
>>>>>>>>>>>> andrey.mashenkov@gmail.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Guys,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've just creates a copy of Inspections
TC build task
>>> with
>>>>> GC
>>>>>>> logs
>>>>>>>>>>>> turned
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on to check if there is any issues
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and found Inspections task spent
too much time in STW
>>> due to
>>>>>>> long Full
>>>>>>>>>>>> GC
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pauses.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've tried to increase Xmx up to
4Gb and use G1GC got
>> 2+
>>>>>>> times better
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> execution time down to ~15 min (~17
for 2G heap).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Increasing heap size only is not
very helpful as it
>> just
>>>>>>> postpone Full
>>>>>>>>>>>> GC
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> issues, but changing GC to G1GC gives
noticeable
>> result.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let's apply this optimization.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Dec 9, 2018 at 12:43 PM Vyacheslav
Daradur <
>>>>>>>>>>>> daradurvs@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi, Maxim, Nikolay, I have the
following questions
>>>>> regarding
>>>>>>>>>>>>> inspections:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Should 'gnite_inspections_teamcity.xml'
been
>> imported
>>> into
>>>>>>> IDEA,
>>>>>>>>>>>> since
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'ignite_inspections.xml' has
been removed in actual
>>>>> master?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also, I've faced mismatching:
if I use
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> '@SuppressWarnings("ErrorNotRethrown")'
in code,
>> then
>>> this
>>>>>>> will be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> marked on TC as "Redundant suppression".
If I
>> removed
>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>> suppression
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in "main" code base (not in tests)
then it's fine
>> and
>>> IDE
>>>>>>> does not
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mark the code by inspection.
But, if I use
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'GridTestUtils#assertThrows'
in 'tests' code base,
>>> then
>>>>> IDE
>>>>>>> requires
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to suppress the inspection, if
I have done it then
>> TC
>>>>> marks
>>>>>>> this as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Redundant suppression".
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What should I do in this case?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 3, 2018 at 10:26
PM Andrey Mashenkov
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <andrey.mashenkov@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Have someone tried to investigate
the issue
>> related
>>> to
>>>>>>> Inspection
>>>>>>>>>>>> TC
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> task
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> execution time variation
(from 0.5 up to 1,5
>> hours)?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can we enable GC logs for
this task or may be even
>>> get
>>>>>>> CPU, Disk,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Network
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> metrics?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can someone check if there
are unnecessary Idea
>>> plugins
>>>>>>> starts that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> safely disabled?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 5:52
PM Dmitriy Pavlov <
>>>>>>> dpavlov@apache.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm totally with you
in this decision, let's
>> move
>>> the
>>>>>>> file.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> вт, 27 нояб. 2018
г. в 16:24, Maxim Muzafarov <
>>>>>>>>>>>> maxmuzaf@gmail.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Igniters,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I propose to make
inspection configuration
>>> default
>>>>> on
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>> project
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> level. I've created
a new issue [1] for it. It
>>> can
>>>>> be
>>>>>>> easily
>>>>>>>>>>>> done
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> recommend by IntelliJ
documentation [2].
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Vyacheslav,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can you share an
example of your warnings?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Currently, we have
different inspection
>>>>>>> configurations:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - ignite_inspections.xml
- to import
>>> inspections as
>>>>>>> default and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> use
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> daily.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - ignite_inspections_teamcity.xml
- config to
>>> run it
>>>>>>> on TC.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Only
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fixed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rules in the project
code are enabled. Each of
>>> these
>>>>>>> rules are
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> marked
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with ERROR level.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1]
>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-10422
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [2]
>>>>>>> https://www.jetbrains.com/help/idea/code-inspection.html
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 20 Nov 2018
at 13:58, Nikolay Izhikov
>> <
>>>>>>>>>>>>> nizhikov@apache.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello, Vyacheslav.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, we have.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim Muzafarov,
can you fix it, please?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> вт, 20 нояб.
2018 г., 13:10 Vyacheslav
>> Daradur
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> daradurvs@gmail.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Guys, why
we have 2 different inspection
>>> files
>>>>> in
>>>>>>> the repo?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> idea\ignite_inspections.xml
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> idea\ignite_inspections_teamcity.xml
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> AFAIK TeamCity
is able to use the same
>>>>> inspection
>>>>>>> file with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IDE.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've imported
>> 'idea\ignite_inspections.xml'
>>> in
>>>>>>> the IDE, but
>>>>>>>>>>>>> now
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> see
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> inspection
warnings for my PR on TC
>> because
>>> of
>>>>>>> different
>>>>>>>>>>>>> rules.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Nov
11, 2018 at 6:06 PM Maxim
>>> Muzafarov
>>>>> <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maxmuzaf@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yakov,
Dmitry,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Which
example of unsuccessful suite
>>> execution
>>>>>>> do we need?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Does
the current fail [1] in the master
>>> branch
>>>>>>> enough to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> configure
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> notifications
by TC.Bot?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please
consider adding more checks
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -
line endings. I think we should only
>>> have
>>>>> \n
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -
ensure blank line at the end of file
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It seems
to me that `line endings` is
>>> easy to
>>>>>>> add, but
>>>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> `blank
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> line
at the end` we need as special
>>> regexp.
>>>>> Can
>>>>>>> we focus
>>>>>>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> built-in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IntelliJ
inspections at first and fix
>>> others
>>>>>>> special
>>>>>>>>>>>>> further?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>> 
>> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_InspectionsCore&branch_IgniteTests24Java8=%3Cdefault%3E&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun,
11 Nov 2018 at 17:55, Maxim
>>> Muzafarov
>>>>> <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maxmuzaf@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Igniters,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Since
the inspection rules are
>> included
>>> in
>>>>>>> RunAll a few
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> members
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> community
mentioned a wide distributed
>>>>>>> execution time
>>>>>>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>>>>>>> TC
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> agents:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -
1h:27m:38s publicagent17_9094
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -
38m:04s publicagent17_9094
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -
33m:29s publicagent17_9094
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -
17m:13s publicagent17_9094
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It
seems that we should configure the
>>>>>>> resources
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> distribution
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> across TC
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> containers.
Can anyone take a look at
>>> it?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've
also prepared the short list of
>>> rules
>>>>> to
>>>>>>> work on:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +
Inconsistent line separators (6
>>> matches)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +
Problematic whitespace (4 matches)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +
expression.equals("literal")' rather
>>> than
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> '"literal".equals(expression)
(53
>>> matches)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +
Unnecessary 'null' check before
>>>>> 'instanceof'
>>>>>>>>>>>> expression
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> call
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (42
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> matches)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +
Redundant 'if' statement (69
>> matches)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +
Redundant interface declaration (28
>>>>> matches)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +
Double negation (0 matches)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +
Unnecessary code block (472 matches)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +
Line is longer than allowed by code
>>> style
>>>>>>> (2614
>>>>>>>>>>>>> matches)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (Is it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> possible
to implement?)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WDYT?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On
Fri, 26 Oct 2018 at 23:43, Dmitriy
>>>>> Pavlov <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dpavlov.spb@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Hi Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
thank you for your efforts to make
>>> this
>>>>>>> happen. Keep
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pace!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Could you please provide an example
>>> of how
>>>>>>>>>>>> Inspections
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fail,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
another contributor could implement
>>>>> support
>>>>>>> of these
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> failures
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> validation
in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
the Tc Bot.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Sincerely,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Dmitriy Pavlov
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
пт, 26 окт. 2018 г. в 18:27, Yakov
>>>>> Zhdanov <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> yzhdanov@apache.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Thanks for response, let's do it
>>> the way
>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>>>> suggested.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Please consider adding more checks
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
- line endings. I think we should
>>> only
>>>>>>> have \n
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
- ensure blank line in the end of
>>> file
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
All these are code reviews issues
>> I
>>>>>>> pointed out
>>>>>>>>>>>> many
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> times
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> when
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reviewing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
conributions. It would be cool if
>> we
>>>>> have
>>>>>>> TC build
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> failing if
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there is
any.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Thanks!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
--Yakov
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
Vyacheslav D.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey V. Mashenkov
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards, Vyacheslav D.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey V. Mashenkov
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey V. Mashenkov
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>>> Andrey V. Mashenkov
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>> Andrey V. Mashenkov
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>> Andrey V. Mashenkov
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> --
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>> Andrey V. Mashenkov
>>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Best regards,
>> Andrey V. Mashenkov
>> 


Mime
View raw message